127
4
he was afraid that his head would be cut off if he did not. It was also proved that about 100 of the other coolies said that they were kidnapped. There was no proof that Kwok-a-Sing had been kidnapped or that he was among those who said they had been kidnapped. The master of the ship and the charterer selected eight of the coolies to be headmen over the others and paid them 3 dollars a piece a month for acting as beadmen. Kwok-a-Sing was one of those selected. At half-past 4 on the afternoon of the 4th of October, when the ship was prosecuting her voyage on the high seas, about twenty of the coolies collected near a seaman, who was keeping guard at a barrier that was placed across the deck, attacked him and threw him overboard. They afterwards attacked the captain, who was walking unarmed on the deck, killed him, and threw him overboard. They also killed several others of the crew and obtained com- plete command of the vessel and changed her course to the coast of China. It was positively sworn by Chun Assun that Kwok-a-Sing was one of those who attacked the captain, and the other witnesses prove that he was one of the coolies who kept the command of the vessel until the vessel arrived back on the coast of China. There was also some evidence that Kwok-a-Sing and other coolies took possession of the captain's watch and a quantity of dollars on board. When the ship arrived on the coast of China Kwok-a-Sing and other coolies left the vessel in a boat. The vessel itself was run aground, and was left to be plundered by the natives. Among the documents returned by the magistrate to the Supreme Court was the following letter from the Colonial Secretary to the magistrate :-
« Hong Kong,
"No. 53.
"Sir,
"Received 3rd February.
"Colonial Secretary's Office,
3rd February, 1871.
"I have the honour to acquaint you, by desire of his Excellency the Lieutenant-Governor, that an application bas been received from Her Majesty's Consul at Canton, claiming on behalf of the Chinese authorities the rendition of the man 'Aping,' who is charged with participation in the murder of a portion of the crew of the French ship Nouvelle Penelope.'
"I have, &c. (Signed)
"C. May, Esq.,
"First Police Magistrate."
"J. GARDINER AUSTIN,
"Colonial Secretary.
5
Several objections were made to the validity of the return, and were argued before the Chief Justice. He delivered Judgment on the 29th of March, 1871, and held several of the objections to be valid, and afterwards, on the 18th of April ordered Kwok-a-Sing to be discharged.
On the 26th of April, 1871, the Attorney- General caused Kwok-a-Sing to be again arrested
on a charge of piracy jure gentium with a view to his trial on that charge before the Supreme Court of Hong Kong. The evidence of witnesses was again taken, and Kwok-a-Sing was committed for trial. Another writ of habeas corpus was issued, and return made setting out the Magistrate's warrant by which he was committed to take his trial. On the 22nd
of May, 1871, he was again ordered to be discharged upon the ground that his second arrest was a violation of the 6th section of the "Habeas Corpus Act."
The first question which their Lordships will consider is whether, assuming that there was sufficient prima facie evidence against Kwok-a-Sing
to prove that he was guilty of the murder of the French captain, and that he was guilty of piracy jure gentium in running away with the French vessel, these acts constitute crimes and offences against the law of China within the meaning of the first Section of Ordinance No. 2 of 1850, or crimes and offences against the Government of China within the preamble of the same Ordinance. There is no doubt that the extreme generality of the words "crimes and offences against the law of China," makes their construction very difficult. Chinese They cannot be intended to mean that every subject who is proved to have done something which, the law of China makes a crime or an offence, is to be given up to the Chinese Govern- ment. If this were the meaning of the words, every Chinese who had done something which the law of China treats as a political offence, or who had done anything which the law of China treats as criminal, though the law of all European countries treats it as innocent, might be given up. Some limitation, therefore, must be put upon the meaning of the words, and their Lordships think that, in determining what that limitation is to be, they ought to bear in mind the position of the Colony of Hong Kong with reference to China. There
[355]
C
{
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.